On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 00:46:19 +0200, Martin wrote
and included this (or some of this):

On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 23:31:46 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 2/9/07 20:23, in article ,
"®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³" wrote:

On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 09:40:42 -0700, La Puce
wrote and included this (or some of this):

On 2 Sep, 17:20, Martin wrote:
Amazing - how lucky you are. How big is your plot in the Netherlands?
100 square metres

gulp That's big.

No it's not. It's 10 metres X 10 metres.


Now a 100 metres square, that's big.

That's 100 metres by 100 metres (10,000 square metres)

Nobody would call me a mathematician but surely what you're saying is what
the mistake is all about. "100 metres square" is what Martin has. "100
metres squareD" is scaringly largely, no? Yes?

We have 100 square metres. It's not scaringly anything. A square metre is a
metric unit of area.

I understand this. I assumed that you have 10m x10m and was
surprised at someone gulping "that's big" in amazement. It's OK as a
decent back garden but not quite Hyde Park.


--
®óñ© © ²°¹°-°³